Senator Teofisto Guingona III. INQUIRER.net file photo
MANILA, Philippines — It will be a no-holds barred hearing.
Barring any hitches, businesswoman Janet Lim Napoles will finally face her accusers and senators at the Nov. 7 Senate inquiry into the P10-billion pork barrel scam.
After a month-long delay, the Senate on Monday finally issued a subpoena for the alleged pork barrel scam operator compelling her to appear at the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee hearing on the scam.
Senate President Franklin Drilon, who was blamed for the delay, approved on Monday morning the subpoena issued by Sen. Teofisto Guingona III, chair of the investigating committee.
“There will be no such condition [that senators won’t be named],’’ Guingona told reporters, agreeing that it would be a “bare-all’’ hearing.
Guingona said that if a court stopped her appearance, it better cite a “good reason.’’ Otherwise, the Philippine National Police would enforce the subpoena on her.
“Let’s not speculate,’’ he said, refusing to accept earlier statement by Napoles’ lawyers that she would invoke her right against self-incrimination if and when she appears at the Senate. “We will only know what will happen when she is actually there.’’
The committee also issued subpoenas for the whistle-blowers: Napoles’ cousin Benhur Luy, Luy’s mother Gertrudes, Marina Sula, Merlina Suña, Mary Arlene Baltazar and Simonette Briones.
On Sept. 23, Guingona requested a subpoena for Napoles. Instead of signing it, Drilon deferred to Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales, who advised against her appearance in the inquiry ahead of a hearing of a plunder complaint against her.
The National Bureau of Investigation filed the plunder complaint against Napoles, Senators Jose “Jinggoy’’ Estrada, Ramon Revilla Jr. and Juan Ponce Enrile, and 34 others in connection with the scam.
Guingona said Drilon was wrong to seek the Ombudsman’s comment, insisting that the independence of the Senate as part of the legislature, a branch of government co-equal to the judiciary and the executive department, must always be respected. Guingona later wrote Drilon appealing for reconsideration of his earlier move. Drilon referred the matter anew to Morales.
Morales responded by saying she was submitting to the “collective wisdom’’ of senators, but was standing by her original opinion. At this point, Drilon called a caucus to decide the matter. Before the caucus last Wednesday, he announced the floor he decided to sign the subpoena.
Napoles has been accused of running her racket from a posh hotel in Pasig City, where her staff churned out letter-requests for funds from lawmakers, using fake signatures of local officials, and concocting dummy foundations as recipients.
“By authority of Section 17, Rules of Procedure Governing Inquiries in Aid of Legislation of the Senate… you are hereby commanded and required to appear before the Committee on Accountability of Public Officers and Investigations of the Senate, then and there to testify under oath on what you know relative to the subject matter under inquiry by the said committee, on the day, date, time and place,’’ Guingona said in the subpoena.
In the subpoena ad testificandum, Guingona set her appearance at the committee hearing on Nov. 7.
Guingona ordered Senate Sergeant at Arms Jose Balajadia to serve the subpoena to Napoles, “care of’’ Police Director Carmelo Valmoria, commander of the Special Action Force in Fort Sto. Domingo, Sta. Rosa, Laguna.
A team from the Sergeant-at-Arms forthwith served the subpoena to Napoles, who is detained at the police camp while undergoing trial for the alleged abduction and detention of Benhur Luy.
In his committee’s hearings in September, Guingona III castigated Justice Secretary Leila de Lima for not bringing the whistleblowers. De Lima said their appearance would telegraph the prosecutors’ punches in the plunder complaint against Napoles.
When Guingona issued a subpoena for them for the next hearing, De Lima, however, complied.
For the same hearing, Guingona also forwarded a subpoena for Napoles to Drilon for his signature, but the latter referred this to the Ombudsman.
In a news briefing, Guingona said the Senate would strictly enforce the subpoena for Napoles.
“The PNP will bring her here,’’ he said on the prospect of a Napoles refusal to appear. “The subpoena means you come here.’’
He stressed that a subpoena would be “compulsory order’’ that must be followed.
Should the court disallow Napoles’ appearance, Guingona said “there should be a very, very good reason to do so because right now I cannot think of any reason why the court will not allow Napoles to come to the Senate.’’
Guingona said he was inclined to call Napoles once.
“I like to think that because of the amount of coordination involved, it might be better just to have her once here. But of course we are not ruling out being called again,’’ he said.
Guingona also defended his decision to call Napoles and the whistleblowers to the same hearing.
“I think it’s very convenient so that we can have a system of cross-checks and balances. Whatever is stated may be validated or repudiated by the whistle blowers,’’ he said.
Guingona also said that all the senators were supportive of the issuance of subpoena for Napoles. The subpoena is a compulsion. You have to follow it.
“Of course, everything is all right. Everything is smooth. Coordination is fine,’’ he said when asked if all was well among the senators. “In fact, the subpoena was brought up only today, and it was immediately signed.’’